WRIA 14 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEETING

 

Wednesday, September 10, 2003

10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

Shelton Civic Center

Shelton, WA

 

DRAFT MEETING SUMMARY

 

Attending: Kim Zabel-Lincoln, Mason County; Theresa Parsons, City of Shelton; Phil Wiatrak, Dept. of Ecology; Bob Simmons, WSU Cooperative Extension; Amy Hatch-Winecka, MCD; Chad Stussy, WDFW; John Konovsky, Squaxin Tribe; Stuart Glasoe, PSAT; & Susan Gulick, Sound Resolutions.

 

 

1.      Finalize Water Quality Grant

q       The TC reviewed the revised water quality grant

q       The grant funding will  1) begin implementation of the water quality monitoring plan, and 2) support the TMDL and the Terry Husseman project by sampling additional parameters.

q       The TC approved the grant (with a few minor edits) and Phil will begin routing the grant for final signatures from Ecology and Mason County.

 

2.      Review Draft Application for Storage Grant

q       Bob S. reviewed a conceptual draft of an application for a storage grant.

q       The application proposes a project to assess the water needs and aquifer storage potential in the area north of Shelton, where water & sewer planning is now being conducted.

q       The TC likes the proposed approach.

q       The next step will be meeting with representatives of the regional task force planning for sewer/water to ensure the application is compatible with their efforts.

q       Representatives of WRIA 14 (Phil, Bob and Warren) are also planning on attending the October meeting of the regional task force to tell them more about the work of the Planning Unit.

 

3.      Comments on Habitat Chapter

q       The TC reviewed the comments received on the habitat chapter.

q       The group agreed it was a good start, but is missing the “meat” because the lead entity strategy is still being developed.

q       The TC believed the chapter is an appropriate framework with the appropriate level of detail.

q       The TC discussed what the PU definition of “habitat” should be.  It is not synonymous with “salmon recovery” because it is not dealing with the other 3 H’s (hydropower, harvest, or hatcheries). 

q       The legislation directs Planning Units to address “fish habitat”.

q       The TC recommends that the plan, at a minimum, address all fish habitat consistent with the LFA.  The PU should be asked if they want to expand beyond that.

q       The PU will want to see the habitat chapter again after the recovery strategy is integrated into the chapter and emphasized that there may be additional comments when the chapter is completed.

q       The TC also suggested that at the end of each chapter, a section should be added entitled “Potential Options for Consideration” that lists potential options to explore.

 

4.      Review Draft RFQ for Hydrogeologic Characterization

q       The TC reviewed the RFQ and made final edits

q       The RFQ will be advertised in the Daily Journal of Commerce but not in other newspapers because most consultants rely on the DJC for such listings (and ads can be expensive).

q       At a minimum the selection team will include Bob, John K. and Jason; others are welcome and encouraged to talk to Susan if they are interested.  Phil will participate but will not be a formal rater.

 

5.      Instream Flow Grant

q       The instream flow grant has been reviewed by Technical Staff at Ecology and WDFW.  They have approved the hydrogeologic study so long as the PU does not use the results as the basis for changing the existing instream flows.

 

6.      Upcoming Meetings

q       The next PU meeting will be on Wednesday, September 24th from 2:30-4:30 at the Civic Center.

q       The next TC meeting will be on Wednesday, October 8th from 10:00-12:00 at the Civic Center.